Consumption and Income Inequality in the U.S. Since the 1960s

Bruce D. Meyer, James X. Sullivan
{"title":"Consumption and Income Inequality in the U.S. Since the 1960s","authors":"Bruce D. Meyer, James X. Sullivan","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3037000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Official income inequality statistics indicate a sharp rise in inequality over the past five decades. These statistics do not accurately reflect inequality because income is poorly measured, particularly in the tails of the distribution, and current income differs from permanent income, failing to capture the consumption paid for through borrowing and dissaving and the consumption of durables such as houses and cars. We examine income inequality between 1963 and 2014 using the Current Population Survey and consumption inequality between 1960 and 2014 using the Consumer Expenditure Survey. We construct improved measures of consumption, focusing on its well-measured components that are reported at a high and stable rate relative to national accounts. While overall income inequality (as measured by the 90/10 ratio) rose over the past five decades, the rise in overall consumption inequality was small. The patterns for the two measures differ by decade, and they moved in opposite directions after 2006. Income inequality rose in both the top and bottom halves of the distribution, but increases in consumption inequality are only evident in the top half. The differences are also concentrated in single parent families and single individuals. Although changing demographics can account for some of the changes in consumption inequality, they account for little of the changes in income inequality. Consumption smoothing cannot explain the differences between income and consumption at the very bottom, but the declining quality of income data can. Asset price changes likely account for some of the differences between the measures in recent years for the top half of the distribution.","PeriodicalId":111949,"journal":{"name":"Econometric Modeling: Microeconometric Models of Household Behavior eJournal","volume":"119 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"70","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Econometric Modeling: Microeconometric Models of Household Behavior eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3037000","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 70

Abstract

Official income inequality statistics indicate a sharp rise in inequality over the past five decades. These statistics do not accurately reflect inequality because income is poorly measured, particularly in the tails of the distribution, and current income differs from permanent income, failing to capture the consumption paid for through borrowing and dissaving and the consumption of durables such as houses and cars. We examine income inequality between 1963 and 2014 using the Current Population Survey and consumption inequality between 1960 and 2014 using the Consumer Expenditure Survey. We construct improved measures of consumption, focusing on its well-measured components that are reported at a high and stable rate relative to national accounts. While overall income inequality (as measured by the 90/10 ratio) rose over the past five decades, the rise in overall consumption inequality was small. The patterns for the two measures differ by decade, and they moved in opposite directions after 2006. Income inequality rose in both the top and bottom halves of the distribution, but increases in consumption inequality are only evident in the top half. The differences are also concentrated in single parent families and single individuals. Although changing demographics can account for some of the changes in consumption inequality, they account for little of the changes in income inequality. Consumption smoothing cannot explain the differences between income and consumption at the very bottom, but the declining quality of income data can. Asset price changes likely account for some of the differences between the measures in recent years for the top half of the distribution.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
20世纪60年代以来美国的消费和收入不平等
官方收入不平等统计数据显示,在过去50年里,不平等程度急剧上升。这些统计数据并不能准确反映不平等,因为收入的衡量方法很差,尤其是在分配的尾部,而且当前收入与永久收入不同,无法捕捉到通过借贷和储蓄支付的消费,以及房屋和汽车等耐用品的消费。我们使用当前人口调查来研究1963年至2014年之间的收入不平等,使用消费者支出调查来研究1960年至2014年之间的消费不平等。我们构建了改进的消费衡量标准,重点关注其衡量良好的组成部分,这些组成部分相对于国民账户以高而稳定的速度报告。虽然总体收入不平等(以90/10比率衡量)在过去50年有所上升,但总体消费不平等的上升幅度很小。这两种测量方法的模式在十年之间有所不同,在2006年之后,它们朝着相反的方向移动。收入不平等在收入分配的上半部分和下半部分都有所增加,但消费不平等的增加只在上半部分明显。这种差异也集中在单亲家庭和单身个人身上。虽然人口结构的变化可以解释消费不平等的一些变化,但它们对收入不平等的变化几乎没有影响。消费平滑不能解释最底层的收入和消费之间的差异,但收入数据质量的下降可以解释。资产价格的变化可能是近年来衡量上半部分财富分布的不同指标之间差异的部分原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Can One Laptop per Child Reduce Digital Inequalities? ICT Diffusion Patterns under Plan Ceibal Broadband, Self-Employment, and Work-from-Home — Evidence from the American Community Survey Gendered Barriers to Formal Healthcare Utilization: Modelling Healthcare Demand in a Low-Resource Setting Leakage from Retirement Savings Accounts in the U.S. Household Head’s Educational Level and Household Education Expenditure in China: The Mediating Effect of Social Class Identification
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1